KmanDoes your pepper spray have a residual effect on the user? I am an LEO in the UK and a defensive skills instructor for other officers. We use cs spray. I have found that once the spray is deployed anyone within the general area will be effected to some degree. As you can imagine this isn't good if you are trying to fight/subdue a person suffering the effect of the spray yourself. I would think that any incapacitant spray that only affects the recipient is better than what we have. Your thoughts or anyone elses.Many ThanksLea

The most popular OC products these days use the Stream or Foam Technologies. That is the pepper particles once proppelled are delivered by a liuquid "carrier". This cuts down on the cross contamination effect by giving "weight" and an "adhesive" quality to the pepper. There is still some "blowback" but it has been greatly reduced from the old days of the pepper going everywhere.

CS is fine powder and thus cannot be delivered the same way without turning it into paste.

Bear, I really can't think of a rational reason why your local government would prefer batons to OC. But then again it's government and doesn't have to be rational. Maybe some deep seated objection to chemical agents? The U.S. army has kind of got this way. We used to use CS in training all the time. Now it's tightly controlled as a chemical munition. It's hard to get issued and recieve clearance for use. Subject to many of the same classifications as a nerve agent would be, simply because it's a "chemical"Lea, I wouldnt describe it a a residual effect, but it definetly has some. I typically feel a little burn in my eyes and exposed skin when I spray someone as well as a little airway constrction. That's one of the reasons we get sprayed during training. So we can handle the effects and stay mission oriented. Pepper definetley does not release noxious fumes as CS does. Just a small amount gets areosolized as it's sprayed. K-

Thanks for the replies guys. Do you find that alcohol or drugs has a bearing on the effectivness of your chosen spray? My last encounter when using spray was in a very confined space with a 17 year old boy who had mental health problems as well as being drunk and tripping on speed. A great combination!!He was also armed with a screwdriver which he managed to hit me in the head with. Luckily for me I was wearing my riot helmet at the time. He was sprayed, hit with a baton, hit with unarmed stikes and had to be physically tied at the ankles with his own shoelaces before we had him under control. There were 7 of us. The only effect that the spray had was to render 2 of the officers totally incapable of trying to restrain this boy as they had to be dragged away and 2 fresh officers brought in. This was in a resturant toilet which got demolished in the process and it was fair to say that we lost our police discount there from then on!!!!I have never seen anyone take as much punishment as this boy as he seemed totally oblivious to the spray or the strikes.Your thoughts.

Lea people with mental health issues usually are very strong and they don’t know their own power, plus with the drugs it is no help. I’m an (OCAT) instructor and going threw their training really gives you the true scoop on how people will respond to O.C. spray. It is not always going to work but some products are better than others but a very good O.C. product is Fox: Five Point Three SHU. Hope this help.

there was a guy on crystal meth and cocain he got in a fight in an alley kicked the guys butt then the adreneline and drugs kicked in to 7 officers with clubs just to get cuffs on pepper spray just doesnt work somtime. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/frown.gif[/IMG]

What’s really bad about the Use of Force policy from state to state is the aspect of the amount of force that can be applied and when.

Drugs and Mentally Ill people, O.C. just won’t do the trick all the time. These people have a very high tolerance for pain and Mentally Ill people sometimes don’t even understand what is going on.

There is a company I know of a Security company called (TSI) Total Safety Inc. here in Vegas. Their use of force policy within the company really shocks me.

They are armed officers but are not allowed to carry any O.C. or an ASP or PR-24. This company places it officers at very high priced gated comminutes to protect the residents that live there. I know a couple of the officers that work at a location in town and there policy even gets worse as I read there policy and procedure manual.

These officers are not allowed to engage an any hand to hand combat with a resident or a burglar even if they’re being attacked, they are to just drive away. If the situation gets to the point of the officer being beat really bad they state in there P&P manual that they have the right to shoot.

This to me was the weirdest thing I have ever read. They’re only are allowed to use numbers 1,2 and then seven. That is a huge lawsuit and is not even with what the law states. If one of their officers were to use deadly force he would be in prison for along time. And some of the officers in the company are certified ASP Instructors and OCAT instructors. That company should use it’s officers resources like these officers that can certify people and add what the law says you have to do, instead of just commanding presence, talking to a suspect and then if need be shoot the person. What a very weird company.

Lea,,,What an effing horrorshow!! Definetly one that you will tell stories about for a long time. He's lucky that he didnt get shot.The alcohol and speed certainly played a big part. As in the coked up guy that I sprayed and batoned with little observable effect.OCman,,the policies you're describing are a classic example of liabilty driven thinking. The employer gets a big break on his insurance at the expense of officer saftey. There's a similar company in my town. It's all about undercutting the competion's rates. Once an incident occurs they can replace the officer that will either get fired for not following company policy to the letter, or quits when he see's the light.K-

Kman: the policies you're describing are a classic example of liability driven thinking. The employer gets a big break on his insurance at the expense of officer safety

You couldn’t be more right. I talked with one of the officers last night on the phone and we where just shooting the stuff and he told me that he had a (HOA) Home Owners Association meeting the night before about future security work on this property his on. Make a long story short he said the if the home owners where to pay $5.00 more a month for their HOA fee’s that officers could carry O.C. and ASP/PR-24 batons. He said the homeowners that where there stated that they where more scared of Pepper Spray and Batons than the site of a gun.

It is just a cheap way for the company’s liability to stay low with insurance. That to me is just down right horrific, to put the safety of an officer at the mercy of the law is not the way to run a company. I mean that an officer might not perform he duties to the best of his/hers ability because they are afraid of a lawsuit or getting hurt. Down right sad.

Unfortunately, it often takes a tragedy to change public opinion. These Security guys will pay the price either way.

Property owners employ Security for various reasons though. Some more for the image of "Security" than anything. I have seen companies that tell their people not to intervene at all, just drive away and call the cops.

Right, wrong or indifferent, these companies make their own decisions on what they value and what they are willing to risk. Hiring another guard is cheap compared to fighting litigation or paying medical expenses.